My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE 2000-2018
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
T
>
THORNTON
>
12751
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0516806
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE 2000-2018
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/26/2019 8:48:15 AM
Creation date
9/26/2019 8:34:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
2000-2018
RECORD_ID
PR0516806
PE
2965
FACILITY_ID
FA0012817
FACILITY_NAME
WHITE SLOUGH WATER POLLUTION CONTRO
STREET_NUMBER
12751
Direction
N
STREET_NAME
THORNTON
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
LODI
Zip
95241
APN
05513016
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
12751 N THORNTON RD
P_LOCATION
02
P_DISTRICT
004
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\wng
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
226
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Comments on Inspection Report <br /> Pre Inspection and Arrival — (third paragraph) Upon completion of the overview, the <br /> inspection team went to Mr. Kerlin's office where they discussed ground water <br /> monitoring with Mr. Schafer, the Laboratory Services Supervisor. Following that <br /> discussion, the group went to the headworks and primaries. <br /> Mr. Kerlin did not feel any member of the team exhibited a "nauseous reaction". The <br /> reaction he observed was normal for sensitive first-time visitors. This is why he <br /> commented that her reaction to the odor was not uncommon, so the team member <br /> wouldn't be embarrassed by her reaction to the smell. <br /> In the fourth paragraph, the digesters were discussed but not toured. No visit to the <br /> Dredger Cut discharge point took place with City staff. <br /> Treatment Facility—Second paragraph, as above, digester discussed, not toured. <br /> Land Application — First paragraph, unsure what is meant by the sentence, "The <br /> Discharger was unclear on the final destination and usage of the feed crop." Mr. Kerlin <br /> does not recall this topic being specifically discussed. The first sentence ending <br /> "...offsite live stock feed" would give an indication that the feed is sold for this purpose. <br /> What is the point of this comment? <br /> Apparently, there is some confusion concerning tailwater and storm water control. The <br /> transmittal letter states, "The Discharger maintains that access around the entire site is <br /> not available.' But here in the Inspection Report it states, "...the Discharger advised that <br /> it would be extremely difficult." Since "not available" and "extremely difficult" are clearly <br /> not the same intent, I questioned Mr. Kerlin on the event. <br /> He stated, "During the inspection, I took Mr. Lockwood to several areas to observe land <br /> application sites. To the northwest of the property adjoining the White Slough Wildlife <br /> Area, we stopped at the edge of City property. Mr. Lockwood asked if we could travel to <br /> the fields just north and observe the tailwater ditch from that area. I assumed he was <br /> referring to right then, not other times of the year. I said it would be very difficult to get <br /> there because once the farmer has crops in the area, they are normally very close to the <br /> irrigation and tailwater ditches and leave little room for a full-size truck like we were in. I <br /> also stated that during irrigation it can be very wet in these areas, and the truck would <br /> get stuck." Mr. Kerlin went on to state, "Mr. Lockwood seemed satisfied with this answer <br /> and, since no previous inspections involved any more detailed tour than being <br /> presented, I thought he understood my meaning. I had already told Mr. Lockwood that <br /> we contain all the tailwater and storm water, and I had never before had a Regional <br /> Board Inspector question my word and had no reason to think Mr. Lockwood would <br /> either." <br /> So to clear up this confusion, let it be noted we do observe the tailwater ditches. The <br /> tailwater ditch for the fields in question serves a land area of approximately 48 acres out <br /> of the 1,000+ acre site. This area can be checked before and after farming season. If <br /> the White Slough staff feels concerned about the integrity of that ditch during the <br /> season, it can be inspected on foot. The remainder of the property can and does have <br /> the ditches checked. We apologize for the confusion on this matter. <br /> 1 10/20/2003 <br /> LCVRW QCB_Attachment.doc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.